Acta Musei Napocensis, 51/I, 2014, p. 75–94

THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CADASTER OF ()*

FELIX MARCU, GEORGE CUPCEA

Abstract: Archaeological sites are impossible to be protected unless their precise location is known. In the recent years, the number of published archaeological repertories, character‑ ised overall, by the same inaccurate data as in the past, increased. Thus, the location area of the archaeological sites is only briefly described, occasionally by even preserving the ancient toponyms. Our attempt herein is to locate and briefly analyse the archaeological sites in an extensively populated area of Cluj county, by providing an as much as accurate topographical location where these sites could be identified in the field, based on previous bibliography and non-invasive methods. Keywords: Archaeological cadaster; Archaeological repertory; villae rusticae. Abstract: Siturile arheologice nu pot fi protejate dacă nu li se cunoaște localizarea pre‑ cisă. În ultimii ani au fost publicate tot mai frecvent repertorii arheologice, caracterizate în general de aceleași date imprecise ca și în trecut. Localizările siturilor arheologice constau în descrieri succinte ale zonei, uneori chiar cu păstrarea vechilor toponime. De aceea, facem aici o încercare de localizare și scurtă analiză a siturilor arheologice dintr-o zonă intens populată din județul Cluj, oferind o localizare topografică cât mai exactă, acolo unde aceste situri au putut fi identificate pe teren, pe baza bibliografiei mai vechi și a metodelor non-invazive. Cuvinte cheie: cadastru arheologic; repertoriu arheologic; villae rusticae.

The issue of high quality archaeological repertories became increasingly topi‑ cal and stringent in the recent years. More and more administrative-territorial units update their general/zonal urban plans, studies of historical and archaeological funda‑ ments becoming integral parts and mandatory. This process entails the record of all reported archaeological finds and sites, their description and, most importantly, their most accurate topographical location, according to Stereo 70 coordinates, as well as the establishment of protection areas. The latter, most expensive, is in fact key for the effective protection of the Romanian archaeological heritage, and why not, a first step for normality thereby. The two authors have completed, within a project financed by the Ministry of Culture, a modern archaeological repertory, according to the most recent standards in the field, for the entire metropolitan area of Cluj-Napoca1. Although the metropolitan area is still in the project phase, the information collected thereof is of real importance and worth disseminating in the scientific environment.

* This work was possible due to the financial support of the Sectorial Operational Program for Human Resources Development 2007–2013, co-financed by the European Social Fund, under the project number POSDRU/159/1.5/S/140863 with the title “Competitive European researchers in the fields of socio- economics and humanities. Multiregional research network (CCPE)”. 1 “Cadastrul arheologic al Clujului” (“The Archaeological Cadaster of Cluj”) – AFCN, I/2011. 76 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea

Thus, possibly the richest commune in the neighbourhood of Cluj city from the view of the archaeological heritage is Apahida, for this reason the authors deciding to develop the repertory and its broad presentation herein. Besides, “Repertoriul Arheologic al județului Cluj” (“The Archaeological Repertory of Cluj county”), pub‑ lished in 1992, one of the most complex catalogue of sites, is obsolete from many points of view, for instance, many of the most important archaeological sites being erroneously mapped. The area around Cluj city and implicitly the territory of Apahida commune was inhabited as early as the Middle Palaeolithic (120000–80000 BC). To the Neolithic belong the first archaeological finds within the range of the commune territory, among which at least three were large-sized settlements. Inhabitancy continues in the area also during the Bronze Age, when settlements are reported on higher grounds than previously. The finds at Apahida, dating back to this period, radically contributed to the research of the Bronze Age. The first Iron Age is also recorded by cemeteries, while during the La Tène period it is noted, like in almost entire , that the Dacians lived alongside the Celts. The latter are recorded by at least two important cremation cemeteries and high value finds. The Dacians are recorded by a settlement at Dezmir, but also by several pottery fragments identified in the territory of Apahida village. In the Roman era, the area was for the first time urbanized. Assuming that Apahida was part of the territory of the Roman town of Napoca, it followed a typical Roman rural development. This is recorded by the impressive number, at least eight rural villae, discovered within the commune area. In addition, epigraphic monuments and even coin hoards have been also found. Finds of the type are abundant in all the villages of the commune territory, which is indicative of the area use for farming purposes, since 2000 years ago. The current territory of the commune is crossed by at least two Roman roads, of which one, highly important, although of secondary rank, connected the town of Napoca to the northern area of the province, towards city and Samum-Cășeiu. Another branch of the Roman imperial road seems to have been detached from the area of Gheorgheni village, ensuring a bypass east the Roman city, of economic and strategic importance, reaching Sânnicoară area. During the migrations, Apahida was, in the light of the archaeological heritage, an important Barbarian power centre. This is fully proven by the three “chieftains” graves identified on the territory of Apahida village. All three, with a rich and highly valuable inventory, record the presence of the German military chieftains, Christianised and officially amicable with the Eastern Roman Empire. At a later date, the territory would be inhabited by the Slavs, and then incorporated in Gelou’s chiefdom, while in the 13th century it was included in the medieval socio-economic system, with the first written records of the villages in the area. In the 13th century (1263), emerges the village Apathyda, as important cross‑ ing site of Someș river, over a bridge, pertaining to a Benedictine monastery in Cluj city area2. In the same period still, also emerge four of the adjacent villages, Pata, Dezmir, Sânnicoară and Corpadea. During the Middle Ages, Apahida became, from

2 See for a brief history of Apahida Cinezan 2008, passim. The archaeological cadaster of Apahida (Cluj county) 77

the property of the abbacy in Cluj, the feudal domain of several families, or even, partially, of the city of Cluj. Its population was involved in the majority of significant events of the period and was constantly active socially and economically. Within the commune territory are established or discontinued a series of settlements. The area has an important farming role, with fertile lands, as well as a trading role, being located in a customs area. During the Austrian control of Transylvania, Apahida is present, by the involve‑ ment of its Romanian natives, in both the uprising of 1711, as well as especially the Revolution of 1848. Later, a turning point in the area development is the commission‑ ing of the railway, in 1869–1871, which resulted in a substantial economic boost of the entire region. The national feeling would be emphasizes towards the end of the 19th century, when Apahida is represented even in the “Memorandum” Movement. During WWI, the Romanian inhabitants were forced to fight for the Empire. After the Union with , the agrarian reform gave land propriety rights, for the first time after almost 1000 years, to a large part of the Romanian natives. During WWII, Apahida was included in the territories lost by the Vienna Award, however, when the war ended, due to its strategic position, it played a key role in freeing from under the Hungarian control. The most important reliable source, sometimes the only source, when reconstruct‑ ing the archaeological layout and sites in Apahida commune was the “Repertoriul Arheologic al judeţului Cluj” (“The Archaeological Repertory of Cluj County”). Identifying the archaeological sites recorded therein was extremely difficult, since most often text descriptions were not mirrored by either the realities in the field or the mapped places. We complied with the numbering in the Repertory, where the archaeological finds within the range of Apahida commune are described, with the eponymous village Câmpenești, Corpadea, Dezmir, Pata and Sânnicoară. We pre‑ served the descriptions in the Repertory, even though sometime the locations are imprecise, cleared them by ST 70 coordinates, quoted in text and mentioned in the field notebook. All points were determined in the field, subsequent to a field walk, with a few exceptions mentioned in the text. Some points are known with unclear location data, others are described by only Hungarian authors in publications by the end of the 19th century – early 20th cen‑ tury. This is the case of the Roman farms, the largest known in the area, which were unknown in the filed: see the case of those at Tarcea Mică or south Sânnicoară village.

Apahida 1. In an unknown location, east the main road, was discovered an obsidian frag‑ ment, as described in “Repertoriul Arheologic al județului Cluj”, number 1 (GPS 7)3. 2. Similarly to no. 1, we find from “Repertoriul Arheologic al județului Cluj” that in the east of the commune, in a garden, was found a silex scraper dated to the Neolithic (GPS 8)4.

3 Orosz 1902, 404 and Roska 1942, no. 92 are quoted, however without further clarification. 4 Orosz 1902, 404; Roska 1942, no. 92. 78 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea

3. Similarly, with a clearer note, yet unidentified in the field, somewhere in a gar‑ den, “La Gârlă”, was found a silex chip, also from the Neolithic (?) (GPS 13)5. 4. The “Repertoriul Arheologic al județului Cluj” mentions Fața Merezii, south- east the commune, there being noted a few pieces of burnt adobe, potshards, bones, silexes, however the period is impossible to specify. 5. In the area of Tăul Cocor (Cocor Pond) (or Tăul Maer/Maer Pond), located near the road from Apahida to , east of it, were identified several prehistoric pottery fragments, half a Dacite axe with cross hole and an obsidian chip6. 6. Similarly to no. 5, somewhere on the hill, were discovered an obsidian chip and a chalcedony scraper, likely still Neolithic7. 7. Near the old train station in the village, where the railway intersects the com‑ munal road leading to , is the place where the “Repertoriul Arheologic al județului Cluj” records pottery fragments, an obsidian chip, a stone tool tip, likely Neolithic, yet also Roman objects. There is also mentioned a Sarmatian mirror dated to the 3rd cen‑ tury AD (GPS 45)8. 8. In the valley of Tarcea stream are reported traces of a prehistoric settlement, on whose surface, on a length of 300 m, were identified pottery fragments, quartz chips, fragments of primitive grinders, animal bones, shells dating most likely to the Neolithic9. This is probably the plateau north the current bypass of Apahida village, nearby the stone quarry, practically in front the place where the stream flows into Valea Caldă creek. There were identified many prehistoric pottery fragments, likely Neolithic (GPS 121). 9. In the area termed the Promontoriul de la Stăvilar, which we could not identify in the field, are recorded two complete grinders, a grinding stone and prehistoric pot‑ tery fragments10. 10. East the village, in the place named Contenit, were identified in the field left the Câmpiei road (by boundary stone 17.2) an obsidian chip, a silex knife and adobe pieces. There were also found a lid and a small vessel with projections and belts, likely Neolithic11. Contenit is the name of the area east the Chibaia plateau, on Pădurița hill, near the villa rustica researched in the 80’ies, at approximately 400 m altitude (GPS 47). In fact, they may likely come from the settlement mentioned at no. 12; it is more clearly specified that the traces (scrapers, cores, blades etc.) were discovered on Chibaia plateau, beside Roman pottery fragments, hence the two locations could be identical or overlapping. 11. The clay-made Neolithic cup found nearby a sand quarry12 most likely comes from by the base of Chibaia plateau, being, we believe, in a secondary position, fallen from the plateau. In the area of this sand quarry were identified most of the prehistoric

5 Orosz 1902, 404; Roska 1942, no. 92. 6 Orosz 1902, 403; Orosz 1905, 305–306; Roska 1934, 18; Roska 1942, no. 92. 7 Orosz 1902, 404; Roska 1942, no. 92. 8 Orosz 1902, 402. 9 Orosz 1902, 405; Roska 1942, no. 92; RepCluj, no. 8, 29. 10 Idem, no. 7. 11 Orosz 1902, 403–404; Orosz 1905, 305–306; Roska 1934, 151; Roska 1942, no. 92. 12 RepCluj, no. 11, 29. The archaeological cadaster of Apahida (Cluj county) 79

traces, yet the Neolithic settlement from where it came is most likely the one described above at no. 10 (GPS 46). 12. Still on Chibaia plateau we also identified in the field prehistoric pottery frag‑ ments, beside those of Roman origin13. The prehistoric settlement must have spread indeed eastwards, to the Contenit (GPS 47)14. 13. The position where the Bronze Age pottery fragments were identified on the south and south-west banks of Cocor pond (Tăul Maer/Maer pond) was approxi‑ mately established (GPS 89). There lies indeed a terrace suitable for habitation. Since the land was not farmed, we could not identify pottery fragments15. 14. Similarly to number 13, yet north the mentioned pond, were also found other pottery fragments dated to the Bronze Age (GPS 87)16. 15. In the place named Malul Gârlei, by km 14.80 of the national road, was found a bronze link with four edges, likely dating to the Bronze Age (GPS 14)17. 16. On the right bank of Someșul Mic river is recorded a settlement dated most likely to the Bronze Age, being found clay weights, potshards and red deer horns18 (GPS 11–12). The area is partially damaged by houses and especially by some large halls. We had no access behind them, eastwards, in order to more precisely identify the location. 17. Still to the Bronze Age belongs a stone link found in the schoolyard (GPS 5)19. It could not be identified in the field. 18. In the area of the so-called Loc al Expoziției were found adobe traces with post prints, dated to the Neolithic20. In the mentioned area, where street Pietroasa from Apahida turns, heading towards SW, have been and are still being built blocks of flats. We could not identify anything in either the farmed land or in the 2 m deep holes made for the supporting pillars of a future block of flats (GPS 85). 19. In Râtul Satului, NE the commune, yet on the hill, E. Orosz had identified in 1896 traces of a Bronze Age settlement, finding stone and bone objects belonging to Sighișoara-Wietenberg culture. Later, once the stone quarry was opened, bronze objects were also found, dating to the end of the Bronze Age: a celt, sickle fragments, a chisel and a pin with projections. In the area were also found pottery fragments dating to the La Tène period21 (GPS 36–37–38–39–40–41–42). We delimited by GPS an area where we also identified pottery fragments in the farmed land, the area being yet broader, extending to the Celtic cemetery described at no. 21 and the sand quarry east Apahida train station, in the area of point GPS 46. In “Repertoriul arheologic al județului Cluj” the area is mentioned as identical with numbers/points 22, 25, 27, 36. E. Orosz estab‑ lishes the stretch of this perimeter as from the area of a spring, most likely the one still

13 See also Ferenczi 1962, 2, 48, 54. 14 Vide supra, no. 10. 15 Orosz 1902, 403; Roska 1942, no. 92. 16 Orosz 1903, 91; Ferenczi 1962, 48, 54. 17 E. Orosz collection (MNIT). 18 RepCluj, no. 16, 30; Orosz 1902, 404–405; Roska 1942, no. 92. 19 Orosz 1902, 404–405; Roska 1942, no. 92; E. Orosz collection (MNIT). 20 Banner 1943, 3, 17; RepCluj, no. 18, 30. 21 Orosz 1908, 179; Roska 1934, 151; Popescu 1944, 104; Horedt 1960, 110, no. 5; Crișan 1961, 147; Soroceanu 1973, 498. 80 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea

preserving nowadays, near the former gravel quarry, 168 m towards N-NE and 250 m towards W-NW, past the road to Jucu, up to the Pădurița hill base22. In E. Orosz’s description, nonetheless, the settlement seems to extend, south the spring, in the area where today lie houses, however we highlighted in plan especially the area N-NW this spring, where pottery fragments similar to those described by E. Orosz emerge. The area delimited in this fashion, seems similar to that described by the author in 1908, hence it is possible it had also been the area described above. The finds are similar and are found in the same area as described at number 22 and partially 21. 20. 30 m NW from the junction between the road leading from Apahida to and to Mociu were identified several pottery fragments dating to the Neolithic ( group), the Bronze Age (Sighișoara-Wietenberg culture), the Roman Empire and to the 4th–5th centuries AD. We could not identify in the field the place, as most likely, more recent houses being built there. Nevertheless, the material seems to have been found in secondary position (GPS 2)23. 21. Some of the most important finds in Apahida lay along the railway, between the km milestones 3 and 3.1, west the junction between the railway and the road leading to Jucu, near and partially overlapping number 19. There were identified Bronze Age pottery fragments (Sighișoara-Wietenberg culture) and Celtic crema‑ tion graves dating to the La Tène. I. Kovács24 carried out archaeological excavations in 1900. Their traces are seen in the field even today. Furthermore, the farming land contains many pottery fragments with projections, belts in relief, incisions or alveoli, similar to those found in previous excavations25. Once the railway was reinforced, there were also identified Roman pottery fragments, bronze items, and a 14 cm-long bronze celt, with scabbard and attachment orifices26. Not many inhabitancy traces could be found, with only a fireplace being identified. According to E. Orosz, the features are specific to certain prehistoric pottery fragments found in the area, yet possibly belonging to the settlement mentioned at no. 19, being similar to those of Petriș culture from Gherla, resembling some pottery fragments discovered in the caves of Cheile Turzii27. The Celtic cemetery is the largest from Transylvania28, with over 50 cremation graves and some inhumation graves investigated. The graves were richly furnished, among the military equipment items counting a bronze helmet plated in golden leaf29. Many animal bones, bone objects, a prism-shaped piercer and a bronze chisel were also discovered. Pottery fragments dating to the first Iron Age also surfaced: wares with grooves30, cattle humeral bones used to decorate pots

22 Orosz 1908, 172. 23 RepCluj, no. 20, 30; information R. Ardevan. 24 Kovács 1911, 1–69. 25 Former E. Orosz collection, today housed with the National History of Transylvania (inv. nos. 3149, 3154, 3173, 3179, 3181, 3221, 3228, 3239, 3241, 3270, 3312, 3339, 3345, 3360, 3385, 3390– 3391, 3394, 3400, 3466, 3507, 3567–3568, 3663, 3665, 3670–3671, 3674–3675, 3679–3681, 3724, 3729, 3770). 26 They were yet found east the railway, in the stone removal pit, see Orosz 1908, 173. 27 Orosz 1908, 179. 28 See also Pârvan 1926, 372. 29 Orosz 1908, passim; Crișan 1973, 51; Daicoviciu, Vlassa 1974, 12. 30 Possibly, to this settlement belongs the funerary urn mentioned by G. Finály as having been found near the train station, on the way to Jucu (see Finály 1898, 429). The archaeological cadaster of Apahida (Cluj county) 81

and a few small iron objects. In terms of the graves’ inventories, it is noted the depo‑ sition of the cremated bones directly on the ground31, with pots, animal bones and various metal objects, all with burning prints, placed around. The pottery consists of wheel-thrown pots, dark-grey, occasionally orange. The most encountered shapes are the biconical pots without handles, the short terrines and the simple bowls. The rims are always reverted and thickened with a cylindrical ring. The decoration con‑ sists of alternate horizontal areas either polished or dull, one horizontal strip in relief on the shoulder, polished zigzags and small series of imprinted concentric cir‑ cles. The larger vessels contained food remains: swine and chicken bones. One grave contained also a skull. The metal objects are either iron or bronze made. Several tools and weapons were found. Amongst count an iron sword with scabbard, arrow and spearheads, shield enarmes and a boss. Most of the metal objects identi‑ fied are jewellery32. Hence, the graves are dated between phases C and D of the La Tène period, suggesting the existence there of a Celtic warlike population arrived there from Western Europe. We also examined 5 surfaces covered with river stones, interpreted as stakes. 22. Equivalent to nos. 19 and 21. 23. Still in Chibaia area, on the plateau over Râtul Satului, similarly to nos. 10, 11 and 12, yet this time, described as dating to the Hallstatt was discovered a biconical urn containing charred bones33. 24. On the extension of hill Ciuha (sic!) are mentioned in “Repertoriul Arheologic al județului Cluj” “on the lowest lands, prehistoric potshards and bone chips”34. This is likely the area from the south, south-west the station in Apahida, which is though not identical with Ciuha hill, spreading nearby Dezmir, being similar to no. 3 described, most likely erroneously, among the finds at Dezmir35. 25. Similar to nos. 19, 21, 22, 25, 27, 36 (GPS 44). 26. Similar to no. 24. 27. Similar to nos. 19, 21, 22, 25, 36 (GPS 46). 28. Another “primitive settlement” is recorded south “Cotitura Someșului” hill, without further notes36. We could not identify it in the field, however it is likely identical with no. 8. Towards NE this place, Someș river makes a broader bend, the hill from the west being likely identified with the hill named as such in the Repertory. Currently, from there is removed the filling earth for the construction of the commune bypass. 29. Between the city hall and the synagogue, in the gardens left to the road, were identified prehistoric objects and a pair of golden earrings37. We determined by coor‑ dinates an area nearby the houses on the left side of the road, the accurate location of the find being likely the area of the gardens behind these houses (GPS 9–10).

31 Information J. Nagy. 32 See RepCluj, no. 31. 33 Orosz collection (MNIT). 34 RepCluj, no. 24. 35 Ferenczi 1962, 46–47, 54. 36 Orosz 1901, 26; RepCluj, no. 28. 37 Orosz 1902, 404; place named in RepCluj, no. 29 Retegan, however unidentified in the field today. 82 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea

30. By the junction between the road from Apahida to Gherla and that to Mociu, in the area where also Omharus’s grave was discovered (no. 42), we identified a foot fragment of a hand-made vessel, likely similar to those Neolithic described at no. 20 (GPS 1). 31. South the previous centre of the village, on the “După deal la Tău” plateau were discovered building remains, stamped bricks, pottery fragments, Roman tiles and an altar dedicated to Dis Pater and Proserpina (CIL III 7656)38. Likely, the loca‑ tion is on the plateau spreading SW the Tăul Cocor (Maier) (Cocor pond), where building traces may be clearly distinguished, even though the most recent develop‑ ments seem to have been made for a WWII battery, the highest point being the proper place strategically. Still somewhere south the village was also found the coin hoard described below at no. 40 (GPS 124). 32. In the place Cocor are mentioned, as having been found in the excavations, wall foundations, red and grey pottery fragments, lamp fragments and a bronze coin from Hadrian39. It is likely that the point is similar to nos. 33 and 34 (GPS 114–118). 33. At this number in “Repertoriul Arheologic al județului Cluj” are men‑ tioned Roman pottery fragments found in a caved-in well, located to the right of the road climbing between Cocor, Darvaș and Pădurița. The position of the three hills is rather interesting. The first two seem to be in fact the same hill, the name of Cocor being the approximate translation of the Hungarian word daru or plu‑ ral daruk, from where the Romanian natives supposed that the name Daravas would come, transliterated though in Romanian and well known to the Apahida inhabitants as the Darvaș hill. Therefore, it is made reference to the road climbing originally between Pădurița hill to the north and Darvaș hill to the south, turning when reaching a plateau to the right (southwards) only to intersect the main road leading from Apahida to Mociu. Somewhere midway the road crossing the plateau from north to south, near a water storage basin, there are noticeable slight field bumps and Roman pottery fragments. Since the land was farmed in the spring of 2010, when the field survey was carried out, other traces could not be found. In the grass we identified what seems to be a rudimentary column base or a supporting post (GPS 114–118). 34. Still, between the three (sic!) hills mentioned at no. 33 were identified terra sigillata fragments and adobe pieces. G. Finály identifies the building on the Hungarian military maps of the 19th century: “Daravas 382” and “Padurita 405”, which were not available to us, concluding it is a Roman signal tower, the building being located in a high area from which you can see up to Cluj, at a distance of 14 km40. The wall length between points A and B, marked on his plan as fig. II, is 5.93 m long and 0.68 m wide, resulting a building of 6.66 × 5.93 m measured from outside the walls41, another argument to identify the structure as signal tower. Nevertheless, among the discov‑ ered objects there are no pieces of military equipment42. The walls are made of local

38 Torma 1880, 18; Finály 1898, 427–428; RepCluj, no. 31. 39 Finály 1901, 239–242; Ferenczi 1924, 271. 40 Finály 1898, 429–430; Finály 1901, 239–240, Fig. I. 41 Finály 1901, 239–240, Fig. 2. 42 Cf. Finály 1901, 240. The archaeological cadaster of Apahida (Cluj county) 83

tuff, also used for the carts road43. In the material yielded counts a coin dated under Hadrian. The place is marked on our maps with a non-hatched red circle, at 185 m NW the GPS points 114–118, where we identified in the field also pottery fragments and the mentioned column base. 35. The Roman building identified at ca. 170 m N-NW the building found at no. 34 was shown to G. Finály by the village teacher E. Orosz44. The building lies this time on hill Pădurița, near Chibaia plateau, to the left of the boundary road climb‑ ing onto the hill finally reaching Jucu (GPS 48–56, 57, 59–66). The building was firstly researched by G. Téglás around 1900 and later, in the 80’ies, by R. Ardevan. The building wall is ca. 0.75 m thick and its total surface is of 20.95 × 10.15 m45. The structure is divided into two by a transversal wall, forming two compartments of 9.60 × 4.20 m (SW), respectively 9.60 × 4.60, the one from NE. The building material is very rich, the wall base being identified at 1.40 m from the surface level preserving five stone rows, the wall being 130 m high46. In the excavation were discovered also many bipedal bricks and even of suspensura47. As resulting from the field walk of 1988, the Roman inhabitancy stretches all over the plateau on a surface of ca. 100–150 mp. In the field, where the Roman building was located, a rich material consisting of pot‑ tery fragments and Roman tiles may be collected. Humps may be noticed, which may though come from the removal pits of the gravel or sand, including on the southern slope, between the GPS points 48–56. In the eastern part, in the field we found Roman pottery fragments until the GPS point 47, hence on a length of almost 650 m. 36. Similarly with nos. 19, 21, 22, 25, 27 (GPS 43–44). We do not know if the pottery fragments discovered in 1896 are Roman, yet given their inclusion in the “Repertoriul Arheologic al județului Cluj”, no. 36, among the Roman period finds, we are tempted to agree they are. In addition, even though the position is similar with the points discovered above, the fragments were identified on the hill, respectively on Chibaia (Pădurița), namely where the Roman settlement at no. 35 was identified. 37. A villa rustica is mentioned also within the boundary Fillereș, archaeologi‑ cally investigated by M. Roska, wares and metal objects being discovered (National History Museum of Transylvania, inventory nos.: 1347–1516). The place can no lon‑ ger be identified, not being specified on any older available map, being novel to all the elder inhabitants we asked. It is most likely confusion, being in fact, one of the mapped villae. 38. Mostly difficult to identify in the field was the villa rustica at Tarcea Mică. Its accurate location was never checked in the field, being quite obvious it lies north the village48, somewhere near Someș river, approximately in the area of the current bypass. It was rightfully located in that area, without yet being checked in the field, since

43 E. Orosz identifies the walls down to 2 m in depth with a 1.5 m thick wall, then argues in favour of an existent Roman well, containing Roman amphora and tile fragments in the filling (cf. Orosz 1913, 77). 44 Finály 1901, 242. 45 Finály 1901, 242. 46 Theowner by early the 20th century, Bács Dumitru, carried stone constantly from there to his house, G. Finály thus learning that much stone was carried from there for the future national road Cluj-Gherla (cf. Finály 1901, 244). 47 Nonetheless, the author argued the floor was clay-made (cf. Finály 1901, 244). 48 RepCluj, no. 38. 84 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea

Á. Buday’s description, the author of the archaeological excavations by early 20th cen‑ tury, fitted with the area. We shall briefly resume below the description that Á. Buday made. The author maintains that while crossing the village along the national road, one must follow a country road leading to the so-called Királyrét49, today identified, likely, with Dâmbul lui Crai, located near the Avicola farms. From there, if following the described road, one reaches the flow into Someș river of a small valley today called Valea Caldă, very close to the current bypass. Since Á. Buday goes on describing that from Királyrét one reaches a valley called Fejérdi patak50, it was understood that it was the area where the villa was discovered. Still, we could not identify it in the field. It suited neither the 1: 960 map, copied after the Hungarian military maps provided by Á. Buday51, where it may be seen that in Fejérdi patak flew from the south a stream based on which the villa was located. The images that Á. Buday provided within the article are neither suitable. The Roman building is thus located at 150–200 steps from a well, across the river52. In the field we could not identify anywhere a stream flowing from the south into Valea Caldă, it being the only oriented east-west as recorded on the 1913 map Fejérdi patak. We were also misled by the original description that Á. Buday made, alike the rest of the archaeologists, however in the end we noticed that another valley flowing from the west lies northwards, past the area named Tarcea, north the place where the Austrian map mentions Kis Tarcsa (Tarcea Mică), respectively in the Feiurd valley, undoubtedly the true Fejérdi patak. This is the valley which forms the current lakes at Câmpenești, village established only the beginning of the 20th century, hence impossible to mention by Á. Buday in 1913. There, in the valley of a stream flowing into Feiurd valley, we identified that so-called villa rustica at Tarcea Mică. The 1: 960 Hungarian map complied with the realities in the field, except the fact that Feiurd val‑ ley was marked southwards, due to the resulted lakes. The well described in 1913 exists even today, and, indeed, at ca. 30 m from it, across the stream, one may note in the field the ruins of the Roman construction, many pottery fragments and Roman bricks and tiles. By the start of the 20th century were identified and archaeologically investigated two buildings, a main building and an extension. The main building, lying most likely near the river, is oriented according to the cardinals, being sized 21.80 × 22.60 m, has two apses, one on the western side and the other on the eastern side53. The building walls were well built, surviving on a considerable height. It was divided in approxi‑ mately 10 compartments, two of which being equipped with hypocaustum. The second building was most likely used as an extension and had no divisions. Many objects were found, from pottery fragments to architectonical elements and a few coins dated to the first half of the 3rd century AD (GPS 122–123)54. 39. The Roman road was still visible by the end of the 20th century to the left of Someș river55. Nonetheless, the majority of Roman finds are on the hills to the right of

49 Buday 1913, 128, 130. 50 Buday 1913, 130. 51 Buday 1913, Fig. 1. 52 Buday 1913, 130–131. 53 The building was eusedr in the 17th–18th centuries (cf. Buday 1913, 131–132, Fig. 2). 54 See Buday 1913, passim. 55 Finály 1898, 427. The archaeological cadaster of Apahida (Cluj county) 85

Someș river, hence it is possible that the road headed to Jucu on the right side, possi‑ bly precisely where the current commune road is nowadays. Geomorphologically, this would be the most suitable position, the Someș river meadows being floodable56. In fact, the road is mentioned also on the Austrian map parallel to the national road, yet always on the right side of Someș river, through Jucu, Bonțida, to Iclozel, where it was identified in the field, in the same location as in Apahida, on the right side of Someșul Mic river, on the first terrace of Someș river (near GPS 43)57. 40. In the area of Cocor Pond (Maer Pond), on the pastureland, was discov‑ ered by chance, in 1987 a Roman coin hoard composed of 1068 coins. The evaluation trenches and field walks in the area led to the discovery of many pottery fragments, evidencing Roman inhabitancy (area of point GPS 89)58. 41. In 1889, on a side road of the village, in a gravel pit, near the commune cem‑ etery was discovered an inhumation grave with a very rich inventory59. It is difficult to locate, yet it is likely the area of the garages south the current park behind the school. There, say the natives, there was a large pit, which might have been the older gravel pit. G. Finály argues also, that the inventory was found by the SE edge of the cem‑ etery, thus concluding that the find was not in situ60. The author had researched the area, however found nothing on a 10–20 m radius, the inventory being found among the stones, likely carried from 200–250 m eastwards61. The inventory consisted of a headknob brooch, of a late type, two buckles with almandine inlays, a massive bracelet with thickened ends, a ring with a cross and inscription Omharus, another ring with cross and monogram and another with four incised crosses, six prism pendants, of which hung five twisted necklaces, a triangular adornment piece with inlays, various golden leafs likely applied on , two silver cups whose walls are decorated with Bacchic scenes and vegetal ornaments, two silver pendants, a bronze buckle and ring. The grave is dated to the second half of the 5th century (GPS 83–84). 42. By the junction of the roads leading to Gherla with that to Mociu, in the former point of traffic control, was discovered in 1968 a quantity of 900 g gold62. The inhumation grave researched in the following year had a very rich inventory. The dead, almost 2 m tall, was oriented towards the west and placed in a timber coffin. The single side preserved in situ was the lower part, there being identified ca. 2 kg golden jewel‑ lery embellished with almandines: buckles, appliques, rosettes, two large appliques in the shape of an eagle from the saddle, tubes, globes etc. There were also identified other harness pieces of silver and iron, among which a spatha placed near the left leg, a glass vessel, fragments of a bronze vessel, bit pieces, a spear heel covered in golden leaf. The grave dates, alike that of Omharus, to the second half of the 5th century AD (GPS 1).

56 Information D. Ursuț. 57 See Ursuț 2008, 98. 58 In RepCluj, no. 40, is mentioned Mărăloiu valley as landmark and the I.A.S. orchard fence, although in the field the place does not seem to correspond. 59 Finály 1898, 305–320; Hampel 1897, 278; Hampel 1905, I, 58; Hampel 1905, II, 39–43; Hampel 1905, III, Pls. 32–36, 45; Horedt 1956, 140–141; Werner 1968, 120–123. 60 Finály 1898, 428. 61 Without further specifications (cf. Finály 1898, 429). 62 Horedt, Protase 1970, no. 111; Protase 1972, 163–176. 86 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea

43. The third grave dated to the same period was found in 1978 below the current post office63. The single inventory piece preserved was a golden buckle decorated with almandines (GPS 6). 44. A high mound still un-researched is reported somewhere near the Avicola farm, between Someș river and Eleveghiu (?) (GPS 13)64. Its location is though uncer‑ tain, the place being likely somewhere between Someş river and the current bypass, in the area called by I. Ferenczi – Eleveghiu or Elővölgy, an area beyond Tarcea. 45. In other points unidentified on the commune territory are also reported under this number in “Repertoriul arheologic al judeţului Cluj” the following: an obsidian core, pottery fragments of the Noua culture, vessels with handles and knobs of the Bronze Age or early Iron Age, cremation graves in urn belonging to Sighişoara- Wietenberg culture and others dated to the Hallstatt, two Dacian pots65, three handmade vessels, an orange vessel of Celtic origin, a Celtic bronze helmet fragments of Dacian pottery, a bronze coin from Antoninus Pius, a denarius from Septimius Severus, one from Iulia Domna, another bronze coin from Gordian III, a bronze returned foot brooch, a vessel with polished decoration dated to the 5th century and Paleo-Christian objects (?)66.

Câmpenești 1. At point Ambraveghi, located on the left bank of Feiurd valley, in 1988, when the country road was made, there were identified pottery fragments dating from the first Iron Age (GPS 15). We established the coordinates on the route of the country road, and identified no archaeological material. 2. At point Măgheruș, west the village, there are five un-researched tumuli (GPS 17–35). In the field, there may be identified a group of projections on a headland in place Măgheruș, yet it yielded no archaeological material.

Corpadea 1. In the place called Ciungui (likely Ciungu), I. Kovács found in 1901, eight pits, of which seven ellipsoidal and one round, apparently houses, although the sizes are too small. The found pottery belongs to the Bronze Age, namely the cultures Coțofeni and Sighișoara-Wietenberg. Based on these excavations, M. Roska used in his works, the names of Corpadea I for Coțofeni and Corpadea II for Sighișoara- Wietenberg (GPS 90–105)67. We identified in the field prehistoric and Roman pottery and traces of ruins/pits on the neighbouring headland, yet no archaeological material. 2. In the village there was found a bronze celt from the early Bronze Age (GPS 106). The single guidance was the map provided by “Repertoriul arheologic al județului Cluj”.

63 Matei 1982, 387–392. 64 Ferenczi 1962, 17. 65 Housed with the Museum of Aiud (inv. nos. 4865–4866). 66 See RepCluj, note 45. 67 Kovács 1913, 1–17; Roska 1942, 132, no. 227, Horedt 1960, 111. The archaeological cadaster of Apahida (Cluj county) 87

3. Within the village is recorded, without any topographical specifications, a brooch68. 4. From other unspecified places come: small vessel-melting pot of Gheja- Bodrogkeresztúr culture, Neolithic, Bronze and Hallstatt pottery, two Eneolithic stone axes and one of bronze, a glass bead69. 5. Roman materials: bronze objects, iron knives, iron link, clay lamp, human face antefix, small jug, likely from a civil settlement (GPS 107)70. For the lack of further details we followed the “Repertoriul arheologic al județului Cluj”. It could be a villa rustica, F. Fodorean supposing that it is in the place where the secondary road Apahida-Reghin71 crosses, yet this seems difficult to prove in the field due to the relief.

Dezmir 1. In the place named Casele Popii there were found a silex scraper and a horn chip from the Neolithic72. 2. On an elevation named La Butiu there lies an Eneolithic settlement73. It is likely the same with that at Tăușor (no. 4). 3. In the place named Ciuha, a hilltop SW the Apahida station, ca. 900 m, in the farmed land, there emerged the traces of 6–7 houses with many adobe pieces, wat‑ tle and Coțofeni pottery from the transition period to the Bronze Age (GPS 141)74. Other source mentions it in a different place than the point, closer to Sânnicoară. Ciuha hill lies SW Sânnicoară and NE Dezmir, by no means SW the Apahida station. 4. On a headland, in the point named Tăușor, an evaluation trench performed in 1963 identified an early Hallstatt settlement, overlapped by one of the 11th–12th centuries (GPS 149–150)75. No archaeological material was found, yet we found an elevation which resembles a barrow. 5. In 1938 by the western border of the CFR (national railway) workshops, in a gravel quarry were found several materials dating back to the first Iron Age. An evalua‑ tion trench carried out in the same year revealed also three cremation graves, of which one had a richer inventory76, even military77. The graves were identified in a gravel quarry. It is a bi-ritual Celtic cemetery, with graves dated to La Tène B – early La Tène C78. 6th century BC Scythian graves and second Iron Age graves are supposed (GPS 136)79. Currently, the former quarry was replaced by the factory Rondocarton SRL. 6. Within the boundary of Crișeni, in a small valley opening towards Someș river, are located Roman buildings foundations, beside which a portion of the Roman

68 Orosz 1906, 368. 69 Pósta 1903, 18. 70 Pósta 1903, 25; Gostar 1961, 160; Kovács 1913, 12–17. 71 Fodorean 2006, 182. 72 Orosz 1905, 305. 73 Orosz 1905, 305. 74 Ferenczi 1962, 46–47. 75 Andrițoiu 1964, 556 (where speaking of Râtul vițeilor); Macrea, Crișan 1964, 354; Orosz 1908. 76 One of the grave goods was a chariot (cf. Crișan 1964, 91; Crișan 1973, 56). 77 A Celt warrior grave dated to La Tène C1 (cf. Crișan 1964, 99). 78 Crișan 1973, 56. 79 Roska 1944, 56. 88 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea

road between Cluj and Apahida was identified. From there, in 1863, comes a votive altar (CIL III 863 = 7661) and a sarcophagus (GPS 143–144)80. M. Roska identifies the place with the one described below, however the two places could be identical81. I. Mitrofan mentions as location the boundary side Sub Colină, near Crișeni82, hence it could be on the stream flowing into Valea Caldă coming from Pata, on the current bypass and likely the Roman road. We are not certain of the location, since we found no archaeological material. 7. Within the boundary Sub Berc there are the ruins of an opus incertum walled building of a villa, excavated in 1903, with small finds: fine pottery, bricks, nails, Neolithic pottery (GPS 142)83. No pottery fragments could be found there as well. It is possible that modern houses were built there. 8. From an unspecified place, within the village territory, comes a biconical vessel dated to the Bronze Age. 9. On the terrace on the right side of Someş valley, near the aero club, were discovered red-black pottery fragments, decorated with grooves, everted bowls, a frag‑ ment with a groove on the rim, dated to the first Iron Age and pottery fragments decorated with alveoli belts and buttons dated to the Bronze Age (GPS 140)84. 10. In the Ciurgău or Sub Muncel area, in fact, east, north-east of it, left the Dezmir stream, were identified pottery fragments dated to the first Iron Age and the Bronze Age (Wietenberg culture) (GPS 146–147)85. We also identified there pottery fragments.

Pata 1. In the place named Pusta Grofului, SW the village, left the country road lead‑ ing to Gheorgheni, there was found by early 20th century a limestone funerary relief (54 × 41 × 17 cm), with a knight and a pedestrian. From the same spot come also Roman and Dacian pottery fragments (GPS 112)86. Orientation after “Repertoriul arheologic al județului Cluj”, yet no material resulted. 2. Near the village, in Curmătura area, were recorded the traces of Roman salt mines87. This is a settlement dated to the first Iron Age (12th–11th centuries BC)88. 3. Within the village boundary, towards Gheorgheni, are seen the traces of the Roman road Napoca-Potaissa. Based on Roman period finds, a rural settlement or a villa89 is supposed. The traces of the Roman road were discovered west the village, by-passing it, after which followed the route towards Dezmir or Sânnicoară, on Pusta stream (Pârâul Sărat) and Zapodie valley (Valea Mare) (see infra).

80 Torma 1865, 13; Torma 1880, 17. 81 Roska 1911, 106. 82 Mitrofan 1974, 6. 83 Described in detail, M. Roska also providing a layout (cf. Roska 1911, Fig. 1). See also Mitrofan 1974, 150. 84 Stan 2008, 33, no. 3. 85 Thesettlement is described as lying even today on Ciurgău, where the river springs, yet the topographical coordinates are similar with those we also provided (cf. Stan 2008, 33–34, nr. 5). 86 Vasiliev 1967, 477–480. 87 Bielz 1898, 67. 88 Field survey (cf. Stan 2008, 37, no. 15). 89 Kővári 1892, 49; TIR L 34, 88. The archaeological cadaster of Apahida (Cluj county) 89

4. From a chance find comes a sestertius from Hadrian90.

Sânnicoară 1. Near the village, in the place named Pripor, was discovered by chance a fragment of a silex tool, dating likely to the Neolithic91. We could not identify the toponym. 2. In the place named Țigla were discovered an obsidian chip and a fragment of a Neolithic silex blade (GPS 135)92. It was equalled with that Sub Coastă, on the pla‑ teau, towards the E, where we also found prehistoric pottery (nos. 3, 6). 3. In the farming place west Țigla, in 1985, there were discovered semi fine, brownish-grey pottery fragments and silex tools belonging to the Tiszapolgár and Coțofeni cultures93. 4. West of the village, in the place named Lab, between the school, church and the right bank of Someș Mic river, there was identified a cremation grave of the Bronze Age, containing charred bones, pottery, likely pertaining to Sighișoara Wietenberg culture (GPS 119–120)94. We identified a few pottery fragments in a private garden across the school and new church. 5. In the garden of the secondary school and the neighbouring territories appear Bronze Age and Hallstatt95 pottery fragments (similar to those found at Cluj- Mănăștur, Dealul Gol). 6. On the terraces of the hill N the village are found atypical pottery fragments, some datable to the Bronze Age. Equivalent to nos. 2, 3 and 7. 7. Left Someșul Mic river, near the village, lies a prehistoric settlement. Equivalent to nos. 2, 3 and 6. 8. By the SW edge of the village, west the hill Tarcea Mică there is a Hallstatt set‑ tlement96. It is erroneously located, hill Tarcea Mică lying left the road to Câmpeneşti. It must be in fact, the equivalent of point Dezmir 9. 9. In the centre of the village, near the church house, appear Roman pottery fragments (GPS 137)97. The land is rearranged, has many fillings, so even if we had identified pottery fragments, their origin would have been uncertain. 10. South the village there were found large building ruins, with sculptural mon‑ uments and objects, now lost, like for instance a funerary relief with a male bust and inscription (CIL III 6254) (GPS 151–158)98. Indeed, on a plateau south the village, when descending from hill “Ciuha”, we found abundant Roman and prehistoric pot‑ tery, tiles and bricks. Likely, in the upper part of the plateau lies the main building of the villa, and below, its extensions.

90 Chirilă et alii 1970. 91 Orosz 1905, 305. 92 Orosz 1908, 257. 93 Kalmar 1985–1986, 405. 94 Erdély 1932, 106–107; Roska 1942, 253; Crișan 1961, 147. 95 Ferenczi 1962, 47–48 (also for nos. 6 and 7). 96 Orosz 1903, 89–91. 97 Orosz 1901, 25. 98 Torma 1866, 147 = Torma 1880, 18. 90 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea

11. NW the village, on the hill on the left river bank, in the place “După capul satului”, the archaeological excavations of 1930 revealed walls in opus incertum, 1.00– 1.50 m thick, bricks, tiles, hypocaust, recording a villa (GPS 138)99. In the field we identified nothing, possibly because the land was not farmed for a long time, or it is a mistake and the place could have actually been the same with no. 10. 12. Close to the western edge of the terrace where the village lies, appear traces of Roman constructions in opus incertum. Nearby appear the traces of a small Roman cremation cemetery100. We could not identify in the field any ruin traces, it could be in fact the villa rustica south the village, described at no. 10. 13. In the Someș river meadows, left the railway Cluj – Apahida, near the train station Dezmir, towards NE, there are two tumuli similar to those in Someșeni101. However, in the area we could not identify in the field any elevation, possibly because the land is levelled and rearranged with filling earth. 14. The Roman road was identified on the Someș river bank102. Likely, there too the Roman road crossed southwards the village near the hill, close to the villa rustica found on the plateau south the village (no. 10). 15. From within the village territory, without further specifications come: an early medieval dark-coloured clay vessel and a hybrid denarius from Caracalla.

The road Gheorgheni – Dezmir – Someșeni The road is a branch of the imperial road – deverticulum, likely a bypass of Napoca municipium, for strategic purposes. On an Austrian map of the 19th century, beside the level curves are mapped the area valleys, as well as the road used for this direction in the period, following the route of the Roman road103. By the exit from Gheorgheni, it follows the route of a deserted country road, to Fântâna Sărată (elevation 356 m). From this point it maintains the N-NE direction, following Pârâul Sărat stream to the interflow with Valea Mare river, coming from village Pata. From the interflow it shifts direction towards N-NW, overlapping the current commune road going to Someșeni. It crosses by Crișeni, Oaselor (to the E) and Borzaș (to the W) foothills. It intersects the Roman road Napoca – Gherla – Samum W the Sânnicoară station, precisely on Someș river bank104. The brick foundations that seem to come from the villa rustica

99 Daicoviciu 1935, 200, Fig. 4 (mentions the cross-signed brick, also recorded by Buday 1913); Mitrofan 1974, 45. In 2003 was discovered by chance an altar dedicated to Silvanus (cf. Ciongradi 2006). Nothing is said about the location except that it was found by some workers in a gravel pit close to the river bank (“in einer Schottergrube”) and on an area of about 2 ha in the immediate vicinity of the discovery some can see other Roman finds, suggesting afterwards that the place could have been identified with the villa rustica mentioned NW of the village, at “După capul satului” (Ciongradi 2006, 213, 215). Nevertheless, the location is still uncertain; the villa is on the left bank and on the hill, not in the flooding area. More possible is that the monument is part of a construction or a sacred area adjacent to the Roman road which might have been nearby. The word ara from the inscription might suggest indeed this fact. 100 Ferenczi 1962, 47–48. 101 Ferenczi 1962, 57. 102 Torma 1884, 16. 103 Fodorean 2006, 150–151. 104 Fodorean 2006, 151. The archaeological cadaster of Apahida (Cluj county) 91

identified in the place Crișeni were found precisely near the Roman road Gheorgheni – Dezmir – Someșeni105. The location is not yet certain. Investigated in the 70–80’ies, then after 1990, it detaches in 900 angle from the imperial road. The road crosses DN1C in Sânnicoară and enters the road Napoca – Gherla near the Someș river106. It fulfilled a military and strategic role, shortening the road towards the forts at Gherla and Cășei by 5 km. Its economic role was to capitalize on the salt resources from Pata and sulphur waters by Oaselor foothill. It was visible W Crișeni, from Dezmir107.

Road Napoca – Gherla The researchers of the Roman roads in Cluj county, D. Ursuț and F. Fodorean, argue that the road route may not be reconstructed up to Bonțida108. The road is noticeable only from Bonțida onwards. As mentioned above, we also noted that the Roman road crossed the area southwards, than eastwards the villages Sânnicoară and Apahida partially on the routes of the current communal roads (see Apahida, no. 39).

We thank herein those who contributed with information for a more accurate identification of the points of archaeological interest, among whom many villag‑ ers. Among the researchers we mainly mention R. Ardevan, D. Ursuț, J. Nagy and E. Beu-Dachin, the latter, yet not the last, who aided us in deciphering the Hungarian texts of the articles by the end of the 19th century – early 20th century.

Bibliography

Andrițoiu 1978 I. Andrițoiu, Cimitirul de incinerație din epoca bronzului de la Deva, SCIV, 15, 2, 1978, 241–256. Banner 1943 J. Banner, Az ujabbkokori lakohazkutatas mai allasa Magyarorszagon/ L’etat actuel de la recherche des habitations neolithiques en Hongrie, AErt, 3, 4, 1943, 1–25. Bielz 1898 E. A. Bielz, Die Burgen und Ruinen in Siebenbürgen, Jahrbuch des Siebenbürgischen Karpathenvereins, XVIII, Hermannstadt 1898, 57–92. Buday1913 Á. Buday, Római villa Kolozsvár “Kistarcsa” nevű határrészében, Dolgozatok/Travaux, IV, 1913, 127–154. Cinezan 2008 V. Cinezan, Apahida. Orașul de mâine, Cluj-Napoca 2008. Chirilă, Lucăcel, E. Chirilă, V. Lucăcel, Z. Milea, I. Németi, I. Ordentlich, Descoperiri Milea, Németi, monetare antice în Transilvania, ActaMN, VII, 1970, 507–508. Ordentlich 1970 Crișan 1964 I. H. Crișan, Morminte inedite din sec. III î. e. n. în Transilvania, ActaMN, I, 1964, 87–110. Crișan 1973 I. H. Crișan, Repertoriul localităților cu descoperiri celtice din Transilvania, Sargetia, X, 1973, 49–70.

105 Fodorean 2006, 153. 106 Ursuț 2008, 105. 107 Ursuț 2008, 105. 108 Ursuț 2008, 106. 92 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea

Crișan 1961 I. H. Crișan, Cimitirul de incinerație de la Bistrița, MCA, VII, 1961, 145–150. Daicoviciu 1935 C. Daicoviciu, Există monumente creștine în Dacia Traiană din sec. II-III?, AISC, 2, 1933–1935 (1936), 192–209. Daicoviciu, Vlassa H. Daicoviciu, N. Vlassa, Descoperiri arheologice din zona Clujului, 1974 ActaMN, XI, 1974, 5–8. Ferenczi 1962 I. Ferenczi, Régészeti kutatások Kolozsvárott (I), Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai, Ser. Historia, 2, 1962, 31–58. Finály 1898 G. Finály, Apahida, AErt, 18, 1898, 428–430. Fodorean 2006 F. Fodorean, Drumurile din Dacia romană, Cluj-Napoca 2006. Gostar1961 N. Gostar, Inscripțiile de pe lucerne din Dacia romană, ArhMold, I, 1961, 149–210. Hampel 1897 J. Hampel, A Nemzeti Múzeum Regisegosztalyanak gyarapodasa, AErt, 1897, 277–279. Hampel 1905 J. Hampel, Alterthümer des früheren Mittelalters in Ungarn I – III, Braunschweig 1905. Horedt 1956 K. Horedt, Valea Someșului Mic în sec. V-VI, ActMuz, 1956, 139–148. Horedt 1960 K. Horedt, Die Wietenbergkultur, Dacia, IV, 1960, 107–137. Horedt, Protase K. Horedt, D. Protase, Tezaurul de aur din epoca migrațiilor de la 1970 Cluj-Someșeni, ActaMN, VII, 185–199. Kovács 1911 I. Kovács, Az apahidai őskori telep és La Tène temető, Dolgozatok/ Travaux, II, 1911, 1–56. Kovács 1913 I. Kovács, A mezőbándi ásatások. Őskori telepnyomok és temető, La-Tène-ízlésű temetkezés, népvándorlás-kori temető. Les fouilles de Mezőbánd, Traces de stations et de cimetière de l’age de bronze, sépulture á la La-Tène, cimetière des tempes migrations des peuples, Dolgozatok/ Travaux, IV, 1913, 165–429. Kőváry 1892 L. Kőváry, Erdély régiségei és történelmi emlékei, Cluj 1892. Macrea, Crișan M. Macrea, I. H. Crișan, Două decenii de cercetări arheologice și stu- 1964 dii de istorie veche la Cluj (1944–1964), ActaMN, I, 307–366. Matei 1982 Șt. Matei, Al treilea mormânt princiar de la Apahida, ActaMN, XIX, 1982, 387–392. Mitrofan 1974 I. Mitrofan, Villae rusticae în Dacia Superior, ActaMN, XI, 1974, 41–60. Orosz 1901 E. Orosz, Ősembertani adatok Erdélyből, Orvos-Természettudományi Értesítő, 26, 1, 1901, 16–46. Orosz 1902 E. Orosz, Szamos-Újvar-Petrisi ősleletek, AErt, 22, 1902, 83. Orosz 1903 E. Orosz, A szamosújvári Lunkai ősemberi telep, ErdMuz, 20, 1903, 10–22. Orosz 1905 E. Orosz, Ősrégészeti adatok a Kis-Szamos folyó völgyéből, ErdMuz, 22, 1905, 303–312. Orosz 1906 E. Orosz, Erdelyi bronzleletekrol, AErt, 26, 1906, 368–375. Orosz 1908 E. Orosz, Az Apahidai “Réti Őstelep” (Kolozs M.), AErt, 28, 1908, 172–179. Orosz 1913 E. Orosz, Római kútról Apahidán, AErt, 33, 1913, 76–77. Pârvan 1926 V. Pârvan, Getica. O protoistorie a Daciei, București 1926. Popescu 1944 D. Popescu, Die frühe und mittlere Bronzezeit in Siebenbürgen, București 1944. Pósta 1903 B. Pósta, Útmutató az Erdély Orsz. Múzeum Érem- és Régiségtárában, Kolozsvar 1903. The archaeological cadaster of Apahida (Cluj county) 93

Roska 1911 M. Roska, Rómaikori villa Dezmér határában, Dolgozatok/Travaux, II, 1911, 106–108. Roska 1934 M. Roska, Adatok Erdely oskori kereskedelmi, muvelodesi es nepvandorlasi utjaihoz, AErt, 47, 1934, 149–157. Roska 1942 M. Roska, Erdély régészeti repertóriuma. I. Őskor, Kolozsvar 1942. Roska 1944 M. Roska, A hari (Hiria, Alsó-Fehér m.) honfoglaláskori sírlelet, Közlemények az Erdély Nemzeti Múzeum Érem Régiségtárából, IV, Kolozsvar 1944. Soroceanu 1973 T. Soroceanu, Descoperirile din epoca bronzului de la Obreja (jud. Alba), ActaMN, X, 1973, 493–515. Torma 1865 K. Torma, Romai feliratok Erdelyből. II. kozlemeny, Archaeologiai Közlemények, 5, Budapest 1865, 12–28. Torma 1866 K. Torma, Romai feliratok Erdelyből, Archaeologiai Közlemények, 6, Budapest 1866, 145–150. Ursuț 2008 D. Ursuț, Drumurile romane din județul Cluj, Cluj-Napoca 2008. Vasiliev 1967 V. Vasiliev, Un relief funerar roman în Muzeul de Istorie Cluj, ActaMN, IV, 1967, 47–80. Werner 1968 J. Werner, Namensring und Siegelring aus dem gepidischen Grabfund von Apahida (Siebenbürgen), Kölner Jahrbuch für Vor- und Frühgeschichte, 9, 1967–1968, 120–123.

Felix Marcu National History Museum of Transylvania, Cluj-Napoca [email protected]

George Cupcea West University of Timișoara [email protected] 94 Felix Marcu, George Cupcea The archaeological topography of Apahida. topography Pl. I. The archaeological